eyelidlessness

9 ms·

61.
by eyelidlessness 2y ago
I can’t say this with certainty, but I have some reason to suspect I might be partially to blame for this fun fact! A couple years ago, I stumbled on a discussion considering deprecation/removal of XSLT support in Chrome. At some point
62.
by eyelidlessness 2y ago
He’s been discussing writable memos for Solid 2.0 off and on for a bit. While the other response is right that you can roll your own, it seems pretty likely this will be a first class thing in Solid too.
63.
by eyelidlessness 2y ago
I think a more objective analysis would admit that it does require this, albeit sometimes not every Monday . And the article makes exactly this concession toward the end, to which I suspect GP’s comment was a glib reference. The objectiv
64.
by eyelidlessness 2y ago
Depends how many basement levels there are.
65.
by eyelidlessness 2y ago
I guess I have too? So has everyone I’ve ever played with.
66.
by eyelidlessness 2y ago
Because both of these are true: John.constructor === Function John !== Function John is (approximately) a reference to a desugaring of its `constructor` “method” (which is the term I see used on MDN, I would have expected some
67.
by eyelidlessness 2y ago
For folks wondering why: this is because a class is (approximately) syntactic sugar for defining a constructor function , and the constructor of a function is `Function`, and calling `Function(string)` is an implicit eval.
68.
by eyelidlessness 2y ago
Right, and that strict definition of “function” is especially important in a language like Gleam. It may be less so in a language like Python where “function” is a much more malleable concept already. All the more reason I don’t think one c
69.
by eyelidlessness 2y ago
I think it might help to start with a baseline assumption: newer high-ish level languages (or any such language looking to expand mindshare) will inevitably be asked “[how] can I run code written in this language in a browser?”
70.
by eyelidlessness 2y ago
I don’t know enough about Gleam’s implementation to say how applicable this is, but from a more general language design perspective… a keyword isn’t inherently imbued with special capabilities that a function call wouldn’t be. They’re seman
71.
by eyelidlessness 2y ago
That’s a reasonable analogy, but I think the more novel and interesting thing about this is that it’s: - A declarative mechanism to relate one element to another - With a range of semantics for declaring interactivity invoked through their
72.
by eyelidlessness 2y ago
It’s not stuck in my craw. It permeates damn near every discussion no matter how remote the connection. It detracts from actual discussion of the actual topic in the process. I actually almost totally agree with the perspective the “joke” c
73.
by eyelidlessness 2y ago
A joke whose punchline can be and frequently is retrofitted to any setup… isn’t a particularly funny joke.
74.
by eyelidlessness 2y ago
My buying strategy has been the same since they started soldering RAM: buy the lowest spec CPU/GPU they offer with the amount of RAM I will need (which all but once has always been the maximum RAM they offer, which unfortunately usuall
75.
by eyelidlessness 2y ago
Not OP, and not my favorite language, but I don’t see how “Apple ships large amount of RAM in expensive workstation” is a legitimate complaint about any language . It isn’t even in the same universe of topics. Completely off-topic JS (and
76.
by eyelidlessness 2y ago
I found their usage of referential transparency odd at first, too. But as I thought about their reasoning more, it clicked for me. If two numeric bindings are semantically distinguished not by their numeric value in absolute terms, but by t
77.
by eyelidlessness 2y ago
You’re not alone! I’ve given up the preference on team projects for pragmatic reasons, but the semantics of (string) enums are still my personal preference.
78.
by eyelidlessness 2y ago
> Honestly, I feel the real lesson here is that, if you want accurate estimates, the job needs to be done end-to-end by someone who's done the exact same thing before - and because things change, "before" really means &quo
79.
by eyelidlessness 2y ago
> So what do we do about it when we don’t even know what questions to ask before setting out on any software project, especially one that ostensibly seems routine? Well, taking the story as metaphor a bit further… there were several oppo
80.
by eyelidlessness 2y ago
This autistic geek finds the excessive cynicism here really tiresome.
81.
by eyelidlessness 2y ago
Renaming the problem doesn’t make it go away. It might be useful for identifying the subset of parsing which is problematic, but I think the article already achieves this well by specifying the subset of input under discussion.
82.
by eyelidlessness 2y ago
Depends why you objected to the Iraq war, I think. From a moral perspective, green lighting the permanent ethnic cleansing of Gaza sure seems worse to me.
83.
by eyelidlessness 2y ago
They’ve long abandoned the pretense of fixing anything, and have gotten a lot of buy in from their base to just torch stuff and leave it in ruins. Unfortunately (for all of us, including for their base) this isn’t actually what people want
84.
by eyelidlessness 2y ago
You knew what they meant, which is clear if you’re able to correct the use of language accurately. This isn’t a criticism per se, but an acknowledgment that language evolves and part of the way it does that is acceptance that “incorrect” u
85.
by eyelidlessness 2y ago
Agree. Although I increasingly spend this iteration time on types/interfaces/documenting proposal of same. The actual implementation below that is often trivial once the boundaries are settled.
86.
by eyelidlessness 2y ago
That’s not so much a reason , in my experience, as a frequent default/inertia position. In other words, I expect to start at that default, and challenge it with reasoning , in order to justify a significant refactor.
87.
by eyelidlessness 2y ago
One reason I might accept one or more NOs to your questions: Does the refactor support pending work, which isn’t directly related to the refactored code, but benefits from the lessons learned and applied in the refactor… even in some indire
88.
by eyelidlessness 2y ago
It’s moving slowly, but I think it’s almost inevitable. Type annotations are generally gaining or maintaining their already widespread popularity, and bringing them into the language syntax would just be an acknowledgment of that fact. I th
89.
by eyelidlessness 2y ago
Is it the language that forces procedural code? In my experience it’s usually the stdlib, but the language itself is capable of declarative constructs outside of existing APIs. If that’s the case, an approach like “functional core, imperati
90.
by eyelidlessness 2y ago
And it’s so advanced because it was/is designed to represent the types of real world dynamic JavaScript. More often than not, when people complain about the complexity of the types they encounter in the TS type system, they’re really c

More ›